A common refrain of those who are familiar with the full scope of former President Donald Trump’s legal troubles was that his historic indictment was just the tip of the iceberg. From the federal investigation to the investigation going on in Georgia, greater potential charges will loom over his quest for reelection and most likely beyond as well. And this week has seen a trial begin that, while not as intertwined with his political career, has the potential to be damning.
A few days ago, former Elle columnist E. Jean Carroll testified in New York in a defamation and battery civil case she brought against Trump in November. She’s alleging that the then-future president assaulted and raped her in the dressing room of Bergdorf Goodman during the 1990s. This is actually the second suit Carroll has brought against Trump: she previously sued him for defamation over statements he made in 2019 when he denied her claim. Her new lawsuit alleged a second claim of defamation over statements Trump made last month on Truth Social, and seeks to hold him accountable for sexual assault via the added battery allegation. She’s able to sue Trump under a new New York law that allows adult victims to file claims that would otherwise be barred by the passage of time, the New York’s Adult Survivors Act.
Trump has denied all allegations.
Carroll’s testimony was particularly striking. She went into detail about the encounter, with them initially having a jovial conversation before being led into the dressing room under the pretense of helping Trump purchase lingerie for someone else. She alleges Trump then shoved her against the wall before sexually assaulting her.
“I’m here because Donald Trump raped me,” Carroll said at the beginning of her testimony on Wednesday. “And when I wrote about it, he said it didn’t happen. He lied and shattered my reputation. And I’m here to try and get my life back.”
Carroll couldn’t pinpoint the exact year the attack happened, and she also asserted her suit had nothing to do with politics (she consistently voted for Democratic presidential nominees during the last two decades). Despite these blips, she’s presented a far more compelling case than Trump. He has not attended the trial, as this is a civil case and he is not obligated to do so, nor is he presenting exhibits or more than one witness besides himself. Carroll has plenty of corroborating witnesses and has used the infamous Access Hollywood tape. The tape is obviously not a confession, but as a “smoking gun” of Trump’s treatment of women in combination with Carroll’s existing argument, it is likely to be effective.
The jury will have to, at its most basic level, decide a “he said, she said” case. But one person is doing a lot better job talking. Carroll came prepared and ready, while Trump is pinning all his hopes on the jury dismissing her poignant testimony as theater. Perhaps the jury has already seen enough either way.
But for Carroll, the trial happening at all was something meaningful. She broke down in tears toward the end of the day, amid continued discussion of the personal cost of going public. “To be able to get my day in court, finally, is everything to me,” she said, her shaky voice rising. “I’m crying because I’m happy I got to tell my story in court.”
